develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from January 2012

Re: [perl #109408] Documentation that refers to Perl 5 as new

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Tom Christiansen
Date:
January 31, 2012 07:43
Subject:
Re: [perl #109408] Documentation that refers to Perl 5 as new
Message ID:
17023.1328024616@chthon
> The ticket's more general question remains, about the start of "new".

I am somewhat leary about calling something "new" (as opposed to  "new to
5.x"), because it's going to be dated soon enough no matter what you do.
Maybe one could use "recent" instead at times, but that still gets stale.

It doesn't seem to make much sense to call things "new" that appeared in a
release that's no longer supported.

I think I myself generally call "recent" the current or previous release,
and stop there.  That means 5.12 is recent and 5.10 isn't.  But not for long.
Maybe 3 years for recent?  Dunno.

One problem is how vendors take decades to ship recent Perl, so that 
changes the recent yardstick to people who just use whatever they 
have shoved at them.  But that's not our fault, and I don't think 
it helps anyone for us to try to cater to it.

--tom
Thread Previous | Thread Next

nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About